Forums

Just played Arnhem solo. Again, I had a great time, and I'm thoroughly enjoying the online implementation of this great game. Here are some random thoughts and ideas in no particular order:

I played the British paras against Johnny(4) this time, as opposed to Johnny(2) who I played against yesterday. I guess Johnny(2) was too busy seething about his defeat to care for a rematch! I wonder if Johnny(4) is a cautious character? He ran away with units after 1 casualty only, and seemed to play a couple of cards like TFH and Firefight early so as to minimise his own casualties, rather than take risks to try to maximise mine. I think Johnny(2) may have taken a different approach!

There's probably actually only one AI with one algorithm, i.e. one play-style, and the (2) and (4) numbers probably have some other explanation. But I like to think of these Johnnies as having their own personalities, so please don't disillusion me too quickly. In any case, this might be a nice myth for DoW to perpetuate

I won 5-2. This was recorded in the Service Records sub-section of the Service Records menu. Hurrah! But neither of the games I have played show up in the other sections of the Service Records menu, those being currently Officer Career, World Rankings, and Commander Skills. Maybe these sections are related only to games with other humans, or maybe they are simply not active yet? The user manual suggests that solo games do not count towards officer promotion (you start as an officer cadet), and maybe they don't count towards world ranking and commander skills either?

There is set to be a comprehensive system of awards and medals for achievements great and small. This will be a fun feature! Again, currently solo games do not count towards these honours. I wonder should there be a separate awards and rating system for solo games? Some players may find it difficult to play against others due to time zones etc., and may end up playing a large number of solo games. Also in some ways I'm guessing it may be easier to rank players with respect to their performance against the AI. I'd like to see some 'real' medals and awards in amongst the game specific ones too. E.g. the Purple Heart for winning a game despite a large percentage of casualties, the Hero of the Soviet Union for playing x number of eastern front games, etc. etc.. I'm guessing some may feel there may be copyright or ethical issues, but I think it could be another educational aspect to the game and would add interest for most players.

The special equipment for the British was labelled "1rst British Airborne". This should be "1st" rather than "1rst" of course. Is it valuable for us to report such small things here? Or shall we ignore these typos because final proofreading is yet to be done? Or should even such small things be reported as bugs?

I'd like to see some sort of chart feature that could be clicked to remind players of unit and terrain capabilities during the game, and something that could be clicked to bring back the scenario background, instructions, and special rules during the game. Maybe it exists already, and I just haven't found it yet!?

The action is fast and furious if you're clicking buttons swiftly. In order to speed things along still further some actions could be made automatic that currently aren't. E.g. when it's clear there is no more combat turn end and card draw could occur automatically. Similarly when there is no more possible movement progression to the combat step could be automatic. Maybe that could be an option in the settings?

At the moment there's no way back after you have moved a unit. The system will not allow you to take a move back and try again. However, you can un-order and re-order units in the order step until you are happy. It seems harsh to me to allow no second chance with moving. I don't want to win games where my opponent moves a unit, maybe even by accidentally taking his finger off the mouse button, realises immediately but can do nothing about it. And I certainly don't want to lose games that way! I can see the point that we don't want players moving and deliberating slowing down play, but maybe each player should have 3 'timeouts' each game where a move can be taken back if still within the movement step, and once they're gone they're gone?

Online play might facilitate the optional and/or tournament feature of a timer. This could work like a chess clock, where each player has half an hour for the game and if your flag falls before the game ends you lose. Or each step could be timed, and if you run out of time, say in the movement step, then you can't move any more pieces that step and the game progresses to combat.

I'd like the option to click the target of a combat to set the combat arrows, rather than drag the arrows from the firer to the target. On a laptop the dragging becomes a drag. This feature already exists for movement. Maybe it's another setting?

I'd also like the option to speed or remove the animations. They are great fun, and important in the computer's movement step in solo play so that you can see what Johnny's up to, but it would be nice to tailor the animations to taste. Sometimes you might just want ultra-quick play if your time is limited.

There's a Karma feature too. A great idea to deter players from bailing out on ongoing games or other such bad karma, I suspect. However, mine appears to have gone from three pips to zero having only played 2 solo games. Maybe I have done something inadvertently bad, maybe it's an unfinished feature, or maybe Johnny(2)'s put the boot in on me with Eric?

Another thought. Ranking points awarded for victories or subtracted for losses should ideally take account of the expected scenario result according to AAR info, and the ability of your opponent. Otherwise, who's going to take on Jesse as the Allies at Omaha? I wonder if this is already built in, or if that kind of handicapping is just too complex to achieve? My fear is that some players will always want to play the favoured side in a scenario in order to improve their rating.

Also, back to the idea of awards for solo games, I was awarded ranking points after the solo games but these don't seem to show up anywhere.

I'd like to see some sort of chart feature that could be clicked to remind players of unit and terrain capabilities during the game, and something that could be clicked to bring back the scenario background, instructions, and special rules during the game. Maybe it exists already, and I just haven't found it yet!?

You missed that part in the documentation. Read the "Basics" chapter:

- right click on anything on the map to pop-up the M44 summary cards. You'll love them!

- Click on the 'i' button in the upper left corner of the screen to get the scenario briefing.

Quote:

Another thought. Ranking points awarded for victories or subtracted for losses should ideally take account of the expected scenario result according to AAR info, and the ability of your opponent. Otherwise, who's going to take on Jesse as the Allies at Omaha? Very Happy I wonder if this is already built in, or if that kind of handicapping is just too complex to achieve? My fear is that some players will always want to play the favoured side in a scenario in order to improve their rating.

Actually, we have a very sophisticated ELO system that takes win/loss stats into account.

I'll write a complete memo about this when I have some time in the next few days. We are quite happy about it.

Just played Arnhem solo. Again, I had a great time, and I'm thoroughly enjoying the online implementation of this great game. Here are some random thoughts and ideas in no particular order:

I played the British paras against Johnny(4) this time, as opposed to Johnny(2) who I played against yesterday. I guess Johnny(2) was too busy seething about his defeat to care for a rematch! I wonder if Johnny(4) is a cautious character? He ran away with units after 1 casualty only, and seemed to play a couple of cards like TFH and Firefight early so as to minimise his own casualties, rather than take risks to try to maximise mine. I think Johnny(2) may have taken a different approach!

There's probably actually only one AI with one algorithm, i.e. one play-style, and the (2) and (4) numbers probably have some other explanation. But I like to think of these Johnnies as having their own personalities, so please don't disillusion me too quickly. In any case, this might be a nice myth for DoW to perpetuate

There is only one well beloved bot right now, Johnny, but he's got a slight case of multiple personalities disorder. Must be all that fighting he's been doing the past few days

Quote:

I won 5-2. This was recorded in the Service Records sub-section of the Service Records menu. Hurrah! But neither of the games I have played show up in the other sections of the Service Records menu, those being currently Officer Career, World Rankings, and Commander Skills. Maybe these sections are related only to games with other humans, or maybe they are simply not active yet? The user manual suggests that solo games do not count towards officer promotion (you start as an officer cadet), and maybe they don't count towards world ranking and commander skills either?

There is set to be a comprehensive system of awards and medals for achievements great and small. This will be a fun feature! Again, currently solo games do not count towards these honours. I wonder should there be a separate awards and rating system for solo games?

Sure down the road we might add this, though for now our focus is on encouraging Player vs Player mode (and yes right now it is not easy to find a live opponent any time of the day - but we expect this will ease up considerably as we open up the beta a bit further - and become relatively easy anytime of the day, in any time zone, once version 1.0 ships)

Quote:

Some players may find it difficult to play against others due to time zones etc., and may end up playing a large number of solo games. Also in some ways I'm guessing it may be easier to rank players with respect to their performance against the AI. I'd like to see some 'real' medals and awards in amongst the game specific ones too. E.g. the Purple Heart for winning a game despite a large percentage of casualties, the Hero of the Soviet Union for playing x number of eastern front games, etc. etc.. I'm guessing some may feel there may be copyright or ethical issues, but I think it could be another educational aspect to the game and would add interest for most players.

Good point. We will come back to it later (and feel free to e-mail us some suggestions via e-mail later on)

Quote:

The special equipment for the British was labelled "1rst British Airborne". This should be "1st" rather than "1rst" of course. Is it valuable for us to report such small things here? Or shall we ignore these typos because final proofreading is yet to be done? Or should even such small things be reported as bugs?

Yes, please file a report on anything you see that is amiss, even if it seems tiny. We will enter it in our DB and address it eventually.

Quote:

I'd like to see some sort of chart feature that could be clicked to remind players of unit and terrain capabilities during the game, and something that could be clicked to bring back the scenario background, instructions, and special rules during the game. Maybe it exists already, and I just haven't found it yet!?

The action is fast and furious if you're clicking buttons swiftly. In order to speed things along still further some actions could be made automatic that currently aren't. E.g. when it's clear there is no more combat turn end and card draw could occur automatically. Similarly when there is no more possible movement progression to the combat step could be automatic. Maybe that could be an option in the settings?

Yes, the commit after the final battle will be in the next release. For the movement phase, we're not so sure, as it might make it too easy to miss what's happening then and make mistakes (since there is no, and won't be any, undo).

Quote:

At the moment there's no way back after you have moved a unit. The system will not allow you to take a move back and try again. However, you can un-order and re-order units in the order step until you are happy. It seems harsh to me to allow no second chance with moving. I don't want to win games where my opponent moves a unit, maybe even by accidentally taking his finger off the mouse button, realises immediately but can do nothing about it. And I certainly don't want to lose games that way! I can see the point that we don't want players moving and deliberating slowing down play, but maybe each player should have 3 'timeouts' each game where a move can be taken back if still within the movement step, and once they're gone they're gone?

We will think about it, but any form of undo is unlikely (like in Chess, if you let the piece go, your move is done).

Quote:

Online play might facilitate the optional and/or tournament feature of a timer. This could work like a chess clock, where each player has half an hour for the game and if your flag falls before the game ends you lose. Or each step could be timed, and if you run out of time, say in the movement step, then you can't move any more pieces that step and the game progresses to combat.

Maybe as an option later on, but not in version 1.0 as we already got lots on our plate.

Quote:

I'd like the option to click the target of a combat to set the combat arrows, rather than drag the arrows from the firer to the target. On a laptop the dragging becomes a drag. This feature already exists for movement. Maybe it's another setting?

Coming in the next release i think.

Quote:

I'd also like the option to speed or remove the animations. They are great fun, and important in the computer's movement step in solo play so that you can see what Johnny's up to, but it would be nice to tailor the animations to taste. Sometimes you might just want ultra-quick play if your time is limited.

Not sure which options we'll have yet, since that part isn't up and running yet, but we'll consider it.

Quote:

There's a Karma feature too. A great idea to deter players from bailing out on ongoing games or other such bad karma, I suspect. However, mine appears to have gone from three pips to zero having only played 2 solo games. Maybe I have done something inadvertently bad, maybe it's an unfinished feature, or maybe Johnny(2)'s put the boot in on me with Eric?

I am suffering from the same, looks like a bug. Thanks for all the detailed feedback.

As an FYI, the Vassal module does have an undo feature for moving. Since most people are familiar with it, it might be nice to implement at some point (even if it might be down the road and not in version 1.0).

One invaluable function of Undo in Vassal is that if the computer every does something weird or wrong, Undo will fix the problem.

If you're sure that there are no errors, bugs, or omissions in the online game, then there would be no need for an Undo here. If there's a chance of bugs getting past the beta testers, then Undo can rescue a messed-up game and protect people's ratings against injustices.

I noticed when the cards enter the card hand they are in random order.
It would be nice if they were grouped by section as I would align them if I was playing at home.....

Left section cards on the left
Right section cards on the right
Tactic Cards together
etc.

This makes it visually easier to see what your options are then when having a mixed array.
Just a thought!!

I noticed the same kind of thing and wasn't sure how to know what the most recently drawn card was. Yann pointed out that the new card appears on the far right, but that doesn't solve your idea of organization.

I don't know anything about programing, so I don't know if this would be possible, but what if the 'card holder' section of the game was divided into flanks like the board. Then the computer isn't sorting them for you (since it might sort them differently than you and I) and we can organize them how we want. As of now, if I pick up a card to play and decide to put it back in my hand it appears on the far right.

I noticed the same kind of thing and wasn't sure how to know what the most recently drawn card was. Yann pointed out that the new card appears on the far right, but that doesn't solve your idea of organization.

I don't know anything about programing, so I don't know if this would be possible, but what if the 'card holder' section of the game was divided into flanks like the board. Then the computer isn't sorting them for you (since it might sort them differently than you and I) and we can organize them how we want. As of now, if I pick up a card to play and decide to put it back in my hand it appears on the far right.

Do players currently have the ability to arrange their hands however they want -- i.e., to move any card to any position on their rack? Or do players only have the ability to pick up a card and move it to the far right?

It's probably easy to create a default sortation order. (For example, left to right, increasing in magnitude, followed by multi-sections, and then tactics alphabetically.) Or even a choice of several sortation orders.

But the ultimate -- especially looking ahead toward overlord with a dozen cards, where you might be planning a certain tactic card for a certain flank -- is to let the player rearrange his cards any way he wants.

But the ultimate -- especially looking ahead toward overlord with a dozen cards, where you might be planning a certain tactic card for a certain flank -- is to let the player rearrange his cards any way he wants.

I second that, the current solution is not the best. If possible, I'd also like the cards to be a little bigger. I know about the right-click option, but I like to see all cards at a glance.

Or even better: A switch in the unfinished "Settings"-Menu, which let's you decide, if right click on an command card shows only the specific card or a zoom view of the entire hand. That would be great.

But according to Eric's post new features have to wait for the moment, but sorry, Eric, it's really fun to think about the possibilities and share them here

But the ultimate -- especially looking ahead toward overlord with a dozen cards, where you might be planning a certain tactic card for a certain flank -- is to let the player rearrange his cards any way he wants.

I second that, the current solution is not the best. If possible, I'd also like the cards to be a little bigger. I know about the right-click option, but I like to see all cards at a glance.

Or even better: A switch in the unfinished "Settings"-Menu, which let's you decide, if right click on an command card shows only the specific card or a zoom view of the entire hand. That would be great.

But according to Eric's post new features have to wait for the moment, but sorry, Eric, it's really fun to think about the possibilities and share them here

I agree with you cards are too small and right click on a card is not so convenient.

I propose to enlarge the cards size automatically when you move your mouse on your cards hand.

I propose to enlarge the cards size automatically when you move your mouse on your cards hand.

+1

About the "undo", if think it would be a good idea but only with a popup for the opponent, asking : "do you accept the undo of your opponent?"

That won't happen because it would disrupt the pace and flow of the game, which we are wont to do. Again (and at the risk of sounding like a broken WW II record ) like in Chess you should think before you move and let go of a piece.

But the ultimate -- especially looking ahead toward overlord with a dozen cards, where you might be planning a certain tactic card for a certain flank -- is to let the player rearrange his cards any way he wants.

I second that, the current solution is not the best. If possible, I'd also like the cards to be a little bigger. I know about the right-click option, but I like to see all cards at a glance.

Or even better: A switch in the unfinished "Settings"-Menu, which let's you decide, if right click on an command card shows only the specific card or a zoom view of the entire hand. That would be great.

But according to Eric's post new features have to wait for the moment, but sorry, Eric, it's really fun to think about the possibilities and share them here

I agree with you cards are too small and right click on a card is not so convenient.

I propose to enlarge the cards size automatically when you move your mouse on your cards hand.

For those of you who find the cards a bit small, two questions:

Are you playing with the game window maximized (ie using up all the space on your screen)? and what are the physical dimensions and resolution of this screen (ie 13 inch and 800x1200, 19 inch, etc..)?

I propose to enlarge the cards size automatically when you move your mouse on your cards hand.

+1

About the "undo", if think it would be a good idea but only with a popup for the opponent, asking : "do you accept the undo of your opponent?"

That won't happen because it would disrupt the pace and flow of the game, which we are wont to do. Again (and at the risk of sounding like a broken WW II record ) like in Chess you should think before you move and let go of a piece.

Once I knew that I couldn't undo my moves it's actually not very hard to be more careful and think through things...not that I always take the time I should! But I like the feel of tournament rules in Memoir '44.

For those who are wondering, I have never 'accidentally' clicked on the wrong place or bumped the wrong button. If there's been an 'interesting' move it has been my doing because I didn't think through my actions before taking them. The system isn't set up for very many accidents!

And you find the cards too small to see?!?! I think the problem might be deeper than the graphics of the game...have you thought about getting glasses (or binoculars)?

I have a 13.3 inch screen and can see the cards just fine. Granted, I'm only 29 and have good eyes, but even so. I do find it hard to see the cards if Memoir '44 Online isn't as large as I can make it because if I have 5 or 6 cards in my hand they have to overlap each other and I can't see the Right Flank cards very well. But it's an easy fix because I just click the little green + button in the top left (I'm on a Mac) and all the cards have their own space!

Are you playing with the game window maximized (ie using up all the space on your screen)? and what are the physical dimensions and resolution of this screen (ie 13 inch and 800x1200, 19 inch, etc..)?

My screen isn't that small either, 1680x1050 on a 22 inch widescreen monitor, game maximized.
The cards can be seen, no problem, but when I want to check my cars in a speedy manner not everything (number of orders, exact title) is recognizable on the first sight.

My screen isn't that small either, 1680x1050 on a 22 inch widescreen monitor, game maximized.
The cards can be seen, no problem, but when I want to check my cars in a speedy manner not everything (number of orders, exact title) is recognizable on the first sight.

I would assume that making the cards bigger all the time is going to require sacrificing some size of the battlefield. Personally I would rather have smaller cards and a larger battlefield, with a system to make the cards larger!

My screen isn't that small either, 1680x1050 on a 22 inch widescreen monitor, game maximized.
The cards can be seen, no problem, but when I want to check my cars in a speedy manner not everything (number of orders, exact title) is recognizable on the first sight.

I would assume that making the cards bigger all the time is going to require sacrificing some size of the battlefield. Personally I would rather have smaller cards and a larger battlefield, with a system to make the cards larger!

That's exactly what I would like to see, the cards shouldn't be bigger by default.

That's exactly what I would like to see, the cards shouldn't be bigger by default.

So you're saying you want the cards even smaller than they are? But then have an effective system to make them larger when you need to see them?

I feel like the cards are about the right size already (I can tell what section they are for from the graphic and I can see the number of units they order in each section.) I can recognize all of the tactic cards from their graphics and if I really needed to read the words I can zoom in to a much larger version of the card with a right-click (in my case 'control-click'). So for me the current system works well!

Like my father always said, "If it's not broke, don't fix it." It seems like you guys are asking for a system that's already in place. I may have misunderstood though. Are you wanting something different?

I wanted to say that I also don't want the cards to be any bigger at the cost of mapsize, I didn't thought about making them even smaller.

You are right, the size is perfect for a quick overview, all I would like to see is a way to zoom all cards at once or at least a quicker way to zoom a specific card. In addition a manual sort would be great.

My humble suggestion (including other suggestions made before):

1. Hovering over a single card automatically zooms it
2. Right click on any card zooms the whole hand in some kind of popup window, where you can rearrange your cards manually and then close the zoom by clicking somewhere outside the window

The problem with the overlapping cards is not a big one for us experienced players. We know what we can do with the card as long as we see the beginning of the name and can see that there is no highligted section wievable.
For a total newbie that hasn't played the boardgame before trying the online game this might be a problem. But as you say you can enlarge them with right click.

Or DOW could make the Order, Move, Battle field in the lower right corner slightly smaller to avoid overlap when the hand is 6 cards.